Evidence for Re-attributing to Pierre Gassendi the Authorship of Anatomia ridiculi muris (1651) and Favilla ridiculi muris (1653)

IF 0.5 2区 哲学 Q3 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Rodolfo Garau
{"title":"Evidence for Re-attributing to Pierre Gassendi the Authorship of Anatomia ridiculi muris (1651) and Favilla ridiculi muris (1653)","authors":"Rodolfo Garau","doi":"10.1163/15733823-20240108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>From 1643 onwards – almost until the ends of their lives –, the philosopher and astronomer Pierre Gassendi (1592–1655) and the mathematician and astrologer Jean-Baptiste Morin (1583–1656) were engaged in a bitter polemic. Scholars in the history of early modern science consider this polemic crucial both for understanding the debate over Galileanism and Copernicanism in France, and for understanding the decline of astrology within scholarly communities. This conflict began with the publication of Gassendi’s <em>De motu impresso a motore translato</em> (1642) and Morin’s subsequent critique of the author’s Galileanism and Copernican stance. As the polemic evolved, it came to include other members of Gassendi’s network, who retaliated with criticism of Morin’s astrological practices – a process that culminated in what Robert Alan Hatch interpreted in 2017 as a significant moment in the exclusion of astrology from French academic discourse. In this paper, I present evidence that two of the texts in this polemical series, the <em>Anatomia ridiculi muris</em> (1651) and the <em>Favilla ridiculi muris</em> (1653), which have traditionally been attributed to Gassendi’s pupil François Bernier (1620–1688), were in fact authored by Gassendi himself. This re-attribution casts Gassendi’s influence on the decline of astrology in early modern France in a different light, while also offering a deeper insight into his intellectual biography and into the composition of his <em>Opera omnia</em>.</p>","PeriodicalId":49081,"journal":{"name":"Early Science and Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Early Science and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15733823-20240108","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

From 1643 onwards – almost until the ends of their lives –, the philosopher and astronomer Pierre Gassendi (1592–1655) and the mathematician and astrologer Jean-Baptiste Morin (1583–1656) were engaged in a bitter polemic. Scholars in the history of early modern science consider this polemic crucial both for understanding the debate over Galileanism and Copernicanism in France, and for understanding the decline of astrology within scholarly communities. This conflict began with the publication of Gassendi’s De motu impresso a motore translato (1642) and Morin’s subsequent critique of the author’s Galileanism and Copernican stance. As the polemic evolved, it came to include other members of Gassendi’s network, who retaliated with criticism of Morin’s astrological practices – a process that culminated in what Robert Alan Hatch interpreted in 2017 as a significant moment in the exclusion of astrology from French academic discourse. In this paper, I present evidence that two of the texts in this polemical series, the Anatomia ridiculi muris (1651) and the Favilla ridiculi muris (1653), which have traditionally been attributed to Gassendi’s pupil François Bernier (1620–1688), were in fact authored by Gassendi himself. This re-attribution casts Gassendi’s influence on the decline of astrology in early modern France in a different light, while also offering a deeper insight into his intellectual biography and into the composition of his Opera omnia.

将《Anatomia ridiculi muris》(1651 年)和《Favilla ridiculi muris》(1653 年)的作者重新归于皮埃尔-加森迪的证据
从 1643 年起,哲学家兼天文学家皮埃尔-加森迪(Pierre Gassendi,1592-1655 年)和数学家兼占星家让-巴蒂斯特-莫兰(Jean-Baptiste Morin,1583-1656 年)就展开了激烈的论战,几乎直到他们生命的最后一刻。研究早期现代科学史的学者认为,这场论战对于理解伽利略主义和哥白尼主义在法国的争论,以及理解占星术在学术界的衰落都至关重要。这场冲突始于伽森迪的《De motu impresso a motore translato》(1642 年)的出版,以及莫兰随后对作者伽利略主义和哥白尼立场的批判。随着论战的发展,加森迪网络中的其他成员也加入进来,他们对莫林的占星学实践进行了反击--这一过程最终导致罗伯特-阿兰-哈奇(Robert Alan Hatch)在 2017 年将占星学解释为法国学术话语中排斥占星学的重要时刻。在本文中,我提出了证据,证明这一系列论战中的两篇文章--《Anatomia ridiculi muris》(1651 年)和《Favilla ridiculi muris》(1653 年)--传统上被认为是加森迪的学生弗朗索瓦-贝尼埃(François Bernier,1620-1688 年)所作,实际上是加森迪本人所著。这一重新归属从另一个角度反映了加森迪对近代早期法国占星术衰落的影响,同时也让人们更深入地了解了他的思想传记和他的 Opera omnia 的创作过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Early Science and Medicine
Early Science and Medicine HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Early Science and Medicine (ESM) is a peer-reviewed international journal dedicated to the history of science, medicine and technology from the earliest times through to the end of the eighteenth century. The need to treat in a single journal all aspects of scientific activity and thought to the eighteenth century is due to two factors: to the continued importance of ancient sources throughout the Middle Ages and the early modern period, and to the comparably low degree of specialization and the high degree of disciplinary interdependence characterizing the period before the professionalization of science.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信